of the action. Williams v. Mudie, 1 C. & P. 158, s. c. 1 R. & M. 34. [Abbott]

A solicitor advised his client to summon a meeting of his creditors. A meeting was called. In the morning of the day, the client asked the attorney whether he could safely attend such meeting with out being arrested for debt, and the attorney told him to remain at his office, until it was ascertained whether the creditors would engage to give him a safe conduct. The client remained at the office of the attorney upwards of two hours to avoid being arrested: The Court held, that the attorney could be examined to prove the whole of those facts, as constituting an act of bankruptcy by the client. Bramwell v. Lucas, 2 Law J. K.B. 161, s. c. 2 B. & C. 745, s. c. 4 D. & R. 367.

The solicitor under a commission of bankruptcy against annuity brokers, who have laid out and expended money on an insufficient security, is bound in an action against the brokers to produce their books under a subpœna duces tecum. Hawkins

v. Howard and Gibbs, 1 C. & P. 222, s. c. 1 R. & M. 64. [Gifford]

The defendant's attorney being called to prove his hand-writing, he refused, on the ground, that he was only acquainted with it from having seen him sign a bail-bond, which being a proceeding in the cause, must be deemed a confidential communication: but it was holden not a privileged communication. Hurd v. Maring, 1 C. & P. 372. [Abbott]

The Court will not restrain a solicitor from disclosing confidential communications in the absence of misconduct. Beer v. Ward, 3 J. & W. 77.

An attorney is not allowed to give evidence of the contents of a deed in his client's possession; the client refusing to produce it. Rex v. Upper Boddington, 5 Law J. M.C. 10, s. c. 8 D. & R. 726. Confidential communications made to an attorney's clerk, on behalf of his master, are privileged. Taylor v. Forster, 2 C. & P. 195: S. P. Bricheno v. Thorp, 1 Jac. 300.

He is bound equally with his master, not to divulge the secrets of the client; and, wherever the master should be prevented from disclosing, the clerk should also be prevented. Rex v. Upper Boddington, 5 Law J. M.C. 10, s. c. 8 D. & R.

726.

But an attorney's clerk may disclose statements made to him by his master, if they be not communicated to him as secrets, and do not affect the interests of any of the attorney's clients, though he is articled, and his articles bind him to keep his master's secrets. Webb v. Smith, 1 C. & P. 337. [Littledale]

A clerk to a solicitor, commencing practice for himself, not to be restrained from acting as solicitor for parties against whom his master was employed, upon general allegations of his having, in his former service, acquired information likely to be prejudicial to the clients of his master. Bricheno v. Thorp, 1 Jac. 300.

One of two solicitors, who where partners, became bankrupt; the assignees excluded the other from interfering with the affairs of the partnership: the Court, nevertheless, refused to order the assig nees to deliver to him the papers belonging to the clients of the firm. Davidson v. Napier, 1 Sim.

297.

(D) DUTIES AND LIABILITIES.

43

It seems to be the business of the solicitor for a private act of parliament, to take care that the standing orders of the House of Commons are complied with, even though they relate to maps, plans, &c. Taylor v. Higgins, 1 Law J. K.B. 19.

An attorney, imagining that the two causes above his own would take up some time, left the court at the assize. On his return, the tenant had been called to confess lease, entry, and ouster. It was not sworn that counsel had been instructed. The Court granted a new trial, on the attorney paying the costs out of his own pocket. Roe v. Doe, 1 Law J. K.B. 154.

Where a deed is executed by a client, in favour of his solicitor, reversing a life interest and power of revocation, it is the duty of the solicitor to leave a counterpart of it in the possession of the client. Balch v. Symes, 1 Turner, 92.

An attorney who takes witnesses to an inn, is prima facie liable to the innkeeper for the expenses incurred. Cariss v. Richardson, 1 Law J. K.B. 11.

The attorney for a parish indicted for not repairing a highway, entered into an agreement with the attorney for the prosecution, whereby he, on the part of the parish, consented to withdraw a special plea and to plead guilty," and also to pay all the costs:" and it was agreed, that the costs to be paid by the said parish, should be taxed by Mr. C: The Court held, that the attorney was personally liable; and also, that it was not a condition precedent that Mr. C should give any notice to the defendant of the time of taxation. Watson v. Morrall, 2 Law J. K.B. 155, s. c. 1 C. & P. 307.

An attorney put in his own clerk as one of the bail, who was not excepted to. After the defendant had rendered, the Court would not listen to an application against the attorney. Pickering v. Sedgwick, 1 Law J. K.B. 248.

The plaintiff in an action on a statute passed for the preservation of game, being insolvent, and his attorney refusing to tell by whom he was employed, the Court directed the action to be stayed, and ordered the attorney to pay the costs that had been incurred, unless in ten days he gave security for the payment of the costs. Smith v. Watson, 2 Law J. K.B. 92.

An arrest having been made by a person not named in the warrant, who did it at the request of the attorney, the Court discharged the party out of custody, and ordered the attorney to pay the costs. Bradbury v. Hunter, 2 Law J. K.B. 79.

Although a rule calling on an attorney to answer the matters of an affidavit is discharged; yet, if there were reasonable and probable grounds for moving for it, the Court will not give costs to the attorney. Doe d. Thwaites v. Roe, 1 Law J. K.B. 245, s. c. 3 D. & R. 226.

Circumstances alone are the criterion by which the rule, that notice to an attorney in one transaction shall be notice to him in another, is governed. Mountford v. Scott, 1 Turner, 280.

Where proceedings were stayed, on an undertaking by the defendant's attorney to pay the plaintiff his costs, such attorney is bound to do so, although the defendant died before the commencement of the taxation or bail put in. Hellings v. Jones, 3 Law J. C.P. 164.

An attorney, by not entering an appearance, pursuant to his undertaking, renders himself liable to an attachment. Mould v. Roberts, 4 D. & R. 719.

The defendant's attorney having undertaken to pay over a sum of money to the plaintiff within one month, he was, on motion, ordered to comply with his undertaking. Birchinshaw v. Jackson, 3 Law J. K.B. 253.

Semble-that in an action against an attorney for negligence, in not making a motion to set aside proceedings for irregularity, if the declaration aver, as the consequence of the neglect, a judgment by default, and further proceedings and final judgment and execution, the judgments are of the gist of the action and not merely special damage. Godfrey v. Say, 3 C. & P. 192. [Burrough]

The Court will not allow an attorney to set up the Statute of Frauds, to escape the consequence of a written undertaking, which he has given in a cause: and they will enforce such an undertaking upon motion; and not leave the party to his action. Senior v. Butt, 5 Law J. K.B. 158.

Where, after payment of debt and costs to the attorney, the agent, not being in due time apprized of this fact, issued execution, under which the debtor's goods were taken,-it was held, that trespass lay against the creditor and the attorney, as the act of misfeazance had been committed after the payment of the debt and costs; though, if the execution had been issued before payment, it would not have been absolutely necessary for them to interfere and stop it. Bates v. Pilling and Seddon, 5 Law J. K.B. 40, s. c. 6 B. & C. 38, s. c. 9 D. & R. 44.

A placed money in the hands of his attorney to invest for him, giving the attorney an unlimited discretion to do what was best; the attorney advanced the money to B on mortgage, but discovering that the security was bad, the attorney sued out a bailable writ in A's name against the borrower for the amount, without A's knowledge: Held, that B could maintain no action against the attorney for arresting him without the authority of A, if the attorney acted bona fide, and A afterwards approved of what he had done. Anderson v. Watson, 8 C. & P. 214.

In general, an attorney who has become bankrupt and obtained his certificate, is not liable to be called upon by motion to pay to a client money which he had, previously to his bankruptcy, received on account of that client. Semble, that it would be otherwise if a case of fraud were established against him. Ex parte Culliford v. Warren, 5 Law J. K.B. 229, s. c. 8 B. & C. 220.

The statute 1 Geo. 4. c. 119. s. 11. enacts, that no suit in law be proceeded in further than an arrest on mesne process by any assignee of an insolvent's estate, without the consent of creditors and approbation of one of the commissioners of the insolvent court: Held, in an action brought by an attorney to recover his bill of costs incurred in an action, at the suit of such an assignee, that it was incumbent on the attorney to prove that the consent of creditors and the approbation of one of the commissioners of the insolvent court had been obtained, or at all events that he had informed his client that such consent was necessary. Allison v. Rayner, 6 Law J. K.B. 85, s. c. 7 B. & C. 441, s. c. 1 M. & R. 241.

It is the duty of an attorney, when instructed to

45

bring an action for an assault for which the plaintiff has previously prosecuted the defendant to conviction, and received a portion of the fine from the treasury, to dissuade his client from proceeding. Jacks v. Bell, 3 C. & P. 316. [Tenterden]

(E) APPOINTMEnt of.

A proper party to a suit, whose name has been inserted in the bill as a plaintiff, without his own knowledge or concurrence, will not, while the record remains in that state, be allowed to appear by a distinct solicitor. Pyecroft v. Gregory, 2 Law J. Chanc. 122.

A retainer to commence a suit which abates, is evidence of a retainer to commence another action. Crook v. Wright, 1 R. & M. 278.

Receiving out of court the money produced by a suit, is equivalent to evidence of a special retainer. Grain v. Wainman, 1 Law J. C.P. 21.

Though it is not absolutely necessary, yet in correct practice, an attorney ought, before he commences an action, to take a written direction from his client for so doing. Owen v. Ord, 3 C. & P. 349. [Tenterden]

An attorney cannot be compelled to attend with a deed at the bearing of a cause, without a subpœna duces tecum, although he was a witness to the deed, and has it in his possession. Bush v. Lewis, 6 Mad. 29.

(F) CONNEXION BETWEEN ATTORNEY AND CLIENT.

If a person knows of an attorney being employed for him by a third person, and does not disapprove of it, the acts of the attorney are evidence against him. Cameron v. Baker, 1 C. & P. 268. [Best]

Where one attorney in the country requests another attorney to do some business for the benefit of his client, the credit may be given to the attorney who is bound to pay the bill of costs, unless he expressly says, that his client alone shall be liable: and the mere circumstance of the client signing his name to some part of the proceeding, and thus becoming known to the attorney employed, is not sufficient to compel him to look to that client for a remuneration for his trouble. Scrace v. Whittington, 1 Law J. K.B. 221, s. c. 2 B. & C. 11, s. c. 3 D. & R. 195.

The circumstance of having no other solicitor, may in some cases be sufficient to constitute a connexion between an attorney and another person, without it distinctly appearing in what particular manner, or to what extent the attorney may have been employed by him in law business. Goddard v. Carlisle, 9 Price, 169.

Application on behalf of the defendants, that the solicitor who had filed the bill for the plaintiff might pay the defendants their taxed costs, on the ground that the plaintiff had absconded eight years before the bill was filed, and that the solicitor never had any instruction from him, but from his brother-inlaw, granted. Hall v. Bennett, 2 S. & S. 78.

Several inhabitants of a parish, attending a special vestry, signed resolutions, by which they ordered an indictment, brought against the inhabitants, to compel them to repair a road within the parish, to be opposed; and that the surveyor of the highways should take the necessary steps for carrying such order into effect. The surveyor having accordingly

46

employed an attorney for that purpose: Held, that the persons who had signed the resolutions were not personally liable to the attorney for the charges incurred in resisting the indictment. Sprott v. Powell, 4 Law J. C.P. 161, s. c. 3 Bing. 478. Clients are not bound by the undertakings of their attorney given whilst conducting a cause, particularly where it is said that they personally agree to do certain acts, Iveson v. Conington, 1 Law J. K.B. 71, s. c. 1 B. & C. 160, s. c. 2 D. & R. 307.

A defendant, having appeared to the action by one attorney, cannot, in the same cause, make any application to the court by another, without having obtained an order for changing his attorney. Ginders v. Moore, 1 B. & C. 654.

The authority of an attorney is determined on final judgment being signed. Macbeath v. Cooke, 1 M. & P. 513, s. c. 4 Bing. 578.

Where a solicitor has lent money to his client, and taken a mortgage for the balance appearing to be due to him by certain accounts, in which the items of his demand are specified,-The Court will not, merely because the parties stood in the relation of solicitor and client, deprive the mortgagee of any part of the benefit of his security. Hampson v. Nicoll, and Nicoll v. Hampson, 6 Law J. Chane. 22. (G) SUMMARY JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OVER. If the proceedings of the Court, as a declaration, be so badly written, as to be almost unintelligible, the Court will in future punish the attorney for the party. Anon. 2 Law J. K.B. 154.

If an attorney, after saying that there is no defence to the action, and that the plaintiff shall not be put to expense, put a plea on the record, the Court will grant a rule, calling on him to shew by what authority he has done it." Harrison v. Eakin, 1 Law J. K.B. 247.

The Court refused to grant an attachment against a person, who had practised as an attorney in the Court of C. P. without having been admitted, but left the party to sue for the penalty given by the 2 Geo. 2. c. 25. s. 24. Matthews v. Royle, 6 B. Mo. 70.

Where the matters charged against an attorney are of an indictable nature, the Court will not call on him summarily to answer them. Short v. Pratt, 1 Law J. C.P. 9, s. c. 1 Bing, 102: s. P. In re Knight and Hill, 1 Bing. 148.

The 2e Geo. 2. c. 46, s. 11. enacts, "That if any sworn attorney or solicitor shall suffer his name to be used by an unqualified person, to enable him to practise as an attorney or solicitor, and complaint shall be made thereof in a summary way, and proof made thereof on oath to the satisfaction of the Court, such attorney or solicitor shall be struck off the roll;" and by the same section it is enacted, "That in that case, and upon such complaint and proof made as aforesaid, it shall be lawful for the Court to commit such unqualified person so acting or practising as aforesaid, to the prison of the said court, for any time not exceeding one year:" Held, that a person brought before the Court on the latter branch of the section, was not entitled to have the witnesses in support of the charge examined vind voce, after the matter had been referred by the consent of counsel

tor of the Crown Office, who reported the

party in contempt; the Court, however, permitted the latter to bring the whole of the case under their own consideration, when brought up to be committed. In re Jaques, 1 Law J. K.B. 5, s. c. 2 D. & R. 64.

Where a sum of money was ordered by the Court to be paid by one party, and his attorney, or one of them, the Court, upon an affidavit that the party had not paid it, and that the attorney had been applied to, granted an attachment against the attorney. Doe d. Humphries v. Allen, 1 Law J. K.B. 153.

If a party in a cause take a promissory note from his attorney, for the debt, which his attorney has received from the opposite party, he deprives himself of the summary relief by application to the Court, to make the attorney pay over the money. Anon. 3 Law J. K.B. 106.

The Court will not refer it to the Prothonotary to inquire into charges made against an attorney, when he is called on to answer the matters of an affidavit, in which such charges are imputed to him. In re -, 5 Law J. C.P. 107.

If an attorney arrest excessively, he is liable to the jurisdiction of the Court as one of its officers, though the case be not within the 43 Geo. 3. c. 46.

s. 3.

But semble, that the Court will not exercise such jurisdiction where the arrest has been preceded by a bill delivered under the statute, a month before action, and the defendant did not apply for a taxation until after action :-at least they will not, unless it be a case of gross vexation. Price v. 5 Law J. K.B. 221.

The Court of Chancery will not exercise its summary jurisdiction, to compel a vendor's solicitor to perform an undertaking given by him at the sale, to do certain acts for clearing the title to the estate. Peart v. Bushell, 2 Sim. 38.

(H) LIEN OF.

A London agent of a country attorney, has no general lien on money received as such agent as against the chent in the country. Moody v. Spencer, 1 Law J. K.B. 1, s. c. 2 D. & R. 6.

A solicitor by taking a security abandons his lien. Balch v. Symes, 1 Turner, 92.

Where a will is in the possession of a solicitor, he has no lien upon it, nor can he refuse to produce a deed executed by the client in his favour, containing a reservation of a life interest and a power of revocation. Baich v. Symes, 1 Turner, 87.

Where the plaintiff's attorney was indebted to the plaintiff in a greater sum than the attorney's costs in the cause, and to his agent on a general account, in a greater sum than the amount of those costs; it was held, that the agent could not, as against the plaintiff, retain out of the sum recovered by the plaintiff more than the costs of the agency in the particular cause. White v. Royal Exchange Assurance, 1 Bing. 20, s. c. 3 B. Mo. 249.

An attorney is not bound to deliver up deeds and papers to the assignees of a bankrupt, until his lien upon them is satisfied. Lambert v. Buckmaster, 2 Law J. K.B. 93, s. c. 2 B. & C. 616, s. c. 4 D. & R. 125.

If a solicitor withdraws from the conduct of a suit, he cannot claim to retain the papers necessary for the prosecution of it, till his costs are paid, but will be ordered to deliver them up, without

prejudice to his lien, to the new solicitor of the party. Colegrave v. — -, 2 Law J. Chanc. 39.

The Court will not order an attorney to deliver up papers in his hands before his bill is taxed on the payment of money on account. Dyer v. Bowley, 2 Law J. C.P. 41.

If a solicitor declines to continue to act for a party, the Court will order that the party be at all reasonable times permitted to inspect all papers relating to the cause, without imposing upon him any condition as to the payment of the solicitor's bill of costs. Moir v. Mudie, 1 Law J. Chanc. 218, s. c. 1 S. & S. 282.

If a deed, by which property is conveyed, be in the bands of a solicitor, the Court, notwithstanding his lien, will compel him to produce the deed, for the purpose of a suit relative to that property; and if he has refused, order him to pay the expenses attendant on his refusal. Brassington v. Brassington, 1 S. & S. 455.

The Court granted a rule to shew cause why a deed, that had been delivered to an attorney by a client, should not be redelivered on payment of what was due. v. Russell, 1 Ken. 129, s. c. Sayer, 125.

An agent in town for a plaintiff attorney, has a lien on the postea, for his costs in the cause, though the plaintiff dies intestate before the agent obtained possession of it; for his authority is exercised beneficially for the administrators of his principal pro tanto, and is not revoked by his death. Taunton v. Goforth, 3 Law J. K.B. 229, s. c. 6 D. & R. 49.

The vendee's attorney sent the deeds of conveyance to B, the vendor, to be executed, who returned them to the defendant, his attorney, executed without any direction. Some necessary parties having refused to execute, the contract was rescinded. In trover by the vendee for deeds and stamped pieces of parchment-it was holden, that the purchaser was entitled to recover the deeds from the defendant, the vendor's attorney, without being subject to the lien which he had against the vendor. Esdaile v.

Oxenham, 3 B. & C. 225, s. c. 5 D. & R. 49.

There had been several actions between the same parties, arising out of the same grievance. The plaintiff had succeeded in three of them, and the principal defendant in one of them. A motion was made to the Court, that the judgment and costs in this action, subject to the lien of the attorney, might be set off against the judgment and costs in the action in which that defendant had succeeded. The attorney claimed a lien on the judgment and costs in this (being the last action in which the plaintiff succeeded), for all his extra costs in all the actions. The Court held, that the attorney had not a general lien, but only a special lien for the extra costs in procuring that judgment. Stephens v. Weston, 3 Law J. K.B. 73, s. c. 3 B. & C. 535, s. c. 5 D. & R. 399.

(1) REMEDY FOR COSTS.

Several persons were deeply interested in different suits at law, which were similar in their nature, and employed the same attorney to conduct the whole business. When any one of them called on the attorney he spoke about all the other cases, as well as that in which he was individually interested, and gave general directions: Held a sufficient

47

compliance with 2 Geo. 2. c. 23. for the attorney to deliver one bill to one of the parties, to entitle him to maintain an action against all of them for the amount of his costs. Oxenham v. Leman, 1 Law J. K.B. 133, s. c. 2 D. & R. 461.

An action may be maintained by an attorney-atlaw, for the amount of his bill for suing out a commission of bankruptcy, although he is not admitted a solicitor of the Court of Chancery, Wilkinson v. Diggell, 1 Law J. K.B. 87, s. c. 1 B. & C. 158, s. c. 2 D. & R. 302.

Where an attorney carried on business at a town remote from his own residence by a clerk, whom he paid by a proportion of the profits: Held, that be could not recover in an action for business done by such clerk from a client, who never saw or knew the principal, nor ever had the benefit of his judgment. Hopkinson v. Smith, 1 Bing. 13, s. c. 7 B. Mo. 23.

In an action on an attorney's bill, it appeared that the plaintiff resided at L, and that he also carried on business at W, by an articled clerk, by whom the business in this case had been transacted: Held, that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover, the business not having been transacted by a person of competent skill and experience. Taylor v. Glassbrook, 3 Stark. 75. [Holroyd]

Receiving out of court the money produced by a suit is equivalent to evidence of a special retainer, and the solicitor will be entitled to recover the amount of his bill of costs. Gray v. Wainman, 1 Law J. C.P. 21.

An attorney suing for a bill, held the defendant to bail for 15l. It had been delivered one month before action brought in the usual manner. The Master taxed at 141. The Court would not give the defendant his costs under 43 Geo. 3. c. 46. s. 3. Anon. 2 Law J. K.B. 151.

It is not necessary for the executor of an attorney to deliver a bill of costs for business done by his testator one month before the commencement of an action. Barret v. Moss, 1 C. & P. 3. [Burrough]

An attorney of a superior court cannot maintain an action for his bill, for business done in the Insolvent Court, in procuring the discharge of an insolvent, without delivering a bill according to 2 Geo. 2. c. 23. s. 23. Smith v. Wattleworth, 3 Law J. K.B. 244, s. c. 4 B. & C. 364, s. c. 6 D. & R. 510, s. c. 1 C. & P. 615.

Although part of an attorney's bill be not set out as directed by the 2 Geo. 2, and therefore not recoverable, still the residue of the bill, as to which the provisions of the statute have been complied with, may be recovered. Drew v. Clifford, 2 C. & P. 69, s. c. 1 R. & M. 280. [Abbott]

Evidence of the retainer and delivery of the bill is sufficient to enable an attorney to support his action. Hellings v. Gregory, 1 C. & P. 627. [Best]

The items of charge for the proceedings in an action must be stated in an attorney's bill upon his client, though they have been previously taxed by the Master, as between the client and the other party.

But, where there are two actions in which there has been exactly the same course of proceeding, and the same charges are proposed, it is not necessary that the items should be repeated. Allison v. Rayner, 5 Law J. K.B. 172.